Spreadsheet Baseball: An Article That Assumes We're Not Using A 3-Man Rotation
"With me, Greinke and Banny, I think that's three pretty good guys going up against anybody," - Royals' All-Star Starting Pitcher Gil Meche.
"Brett Tomko is No. 4 for me. I told Brett before we ever signed him, before he chose us over Cincinnati, 'You need to know, in a perfect scenario, what I want as a manager and what we are looking for as an organization. And that's for you to be a part of our rotation.'" - New Fearless Leader Trey Hillman.
"You go to Jorge De La Rosa," Hillman said. "We'd love to have a lefty in our mix and I'm not going to try to hide the excitement of having either him or a John Bale moving out of the bullpen." - Hillman again, kind of scaring yours truly.
As a blogger, one of the things you often here is that we're too negative as a species. After all, it's so much easier to critique the people who actually get paid for their jobs--sportswriters, players, managers--than it is to actually do work on par with one of these people. Think Tony Pena's a bum, do you? Get out there and hit that spheroid yourself. Think Hillman's already a bad manager? You don't have the first clue how to manage a clubhouse. Think you're a better writer than Woody Paige or Jay Mariotti? You are. Sorry, the sportswriter thing is a bad example.
So I don't want anyone getting the wrong idea about the quotes above. I recognize that I've takne all three from an mlb.com article that ran at the end of last month and that Hillman's mind could have changed. I'm not judging--or condemning--Hillman based on the idea that he'd like Brett Tomko and and Jorge de la Rosa to do well. I'm simply looking to try and sort out the competition for the fourth and fifth rotation spots for the Royals. I've no doubt Hillman knows more about these players than I do, of course. But don't mistake thinking critically for thinking negatively. With any luck, our hero Gilgameche is correct in his quote. If that's so, then we can look forward to a nice 1-2-3 punch in the rotation in 2008. What's clear is that those three are virtually entrenched unless there's some kind of injury or other shocking development in ST (please no).
With Meche, Bannister, and Greinke penned in, that leaves the fourth and fifth sports. Today we'll look at the hopefuls for those spots. While it's true that hardly any team has good enough depth to boost a truly "good" fourth starter and that the fifth starter can be skipped quite frequently, who these innings go to and how they do with them will still have an impact on the Royals this year.
Hillman's Hero: Brett Tomko
2007 Stats of Note:
131.1 IP, 40-19 G-GS, 88 ERA+, 5.55 ERA, 10.24 H/9, 7.20 K/9, 3.29 BB/9, 1.24 HR/9
Okay look, I'm not seriously suggesting that Hillman has a mancrush on Brett Tomko, but I'd feel a lot better if Hillman had said something to the effect or "Tomko will compete for a rotation spot" instead of that line about being the fourth starter. The problem is that Tomko might actually be one of the best options available...Hillman might be depressingly right about Brett's spot on the Royals' pitching depth chart.
The above stat line, coming from the soon-to-be 35-year-old Tomko, looks like that of a pitcher who is losing his ability to work within the zone and not pay for it. That K-Rate is actually pretty nice, but it may have received a PETCO-induced boost towards the end of the year. Really, if Tomko is in the Royals' rotation...there are worse things, but here's hoping someone forces him and his $3 million dollars to the bullpen. There was, I'll argue, nothing really wrong with his signing, as the Royals allgedly have more cash to burn and it's only a one-year deal. Committing to him in the rotation should only happening if the younger possibilities aren't ready or just make no sense. You remember how Gil Meche brought his HR rate down moving to the K? Don't count on that happening with Mr. Tomko. This could be the end of an...er...undeniably persistent career from ol' Brett, during which his ERA+ has been above average only twice in eleven years, but then again pitching out of the 'pen might extend his career a couple more years.
Token Lefty Possibility: Jorge de la Rosa
2007 Stats of Note:
130.0 IP, 26-23 G-GS, 81 ERA+, 5.82 ERA, 11.08 H/9, 5.68 K/9, 3.67 BB/9, 1.38 HR/9
Ouch. I just basically took Brett Tomko apart, and even single rate listed here for de la Rosa is markedly worse than Tomko's own numbers in pretty much the exact same amount of pitching. To be fair, de la Rosa hadn't carried this type of workload since he made it to the majors, but the line between "giving him starts to see what he's got" and "know when to cut bait" was passed last year when Kansas City kept a struggling de la Rosa in the rotation while Zack Greinke lit it up in the bullpen. de la Rosa displayed better control than he has in the past, and could make a passable lefty reliever. We can only hope that Hillman and Co. figure out that having a passable starter in the rotation is miles better than having a crappy lefty penciled in just because he's left-handed and "gives the other team a different look."
Really, the problem for de la Rosa can be summed up with the platoon split for 2007:
Lefties Vs. JDLR: .234/.305/.299
Righties Vs. JDLR: .321/.384/.557
That is a darn strong argument that this guy should be arm-wrestling Jimmy Gobble for the LOOGY job rather than competing for a starting job.
Last Year's Deadline Prize: Kyle Davies
2007 Stats of Note:
136.0 IP, 28-28 G-GS, 73 ERA+, 6.09 ERA, 10.26 H/9, 6.55 K/9, 4.63 BB/9, 1.46 HR/9
While Davies is regarded to have more upside as a starter than either de la Rosa or Tomko (of course), very few pitchers in baseball did less to earn 20+ starts than Davies did. After coming over from the Braves for a damaged Octavio Dotel, Davies' ERA was an abysmal 71 and he continued to hand out walks like they were going out of style. Even more troubling, he wasn't even "effectively wild," as he gave up a home run every five innings in a Royal uniform. It's tough to see Davies succeeding without a major overhaul of the way he was pitching last year. Even at just 23, his stock has fallen quite a bit since he broke into the league at age 21. Whether it's injuries, bad mechanics, or--likely--a combination of both, this is a kid who needs some serious help from the Royals coaching staff and some serious work ethic if he's going to turn things around. His 2007 line just isn't major league quality, and certainly is befitting of a guy with "three good pitches."
As I said at the time of the trade, it was near impossible to lose when all we gave up was Mr. 23-innings-as-a-Royal Dotel, but it's not clear if there's even going to be a winner here at all. I'd be appreciative if you all could let me know how Davies looks if you get a chance to catch him on TV. Right now, he profiles as AAA to start the year.
Golden Boy: Luke Hochevar
While it might not be fair to Luke to compare him to Miller or Lincecum, it's pretty darn fair to ask if he's going to make it as a major league pitcher. I'm noy privy to Hochevar's attitude or work habits, so I'm not going to be the one who's going to stand up and tell you he's too lazy or whatever to become a major league starter. I am going to be the one who tells you that unless he finds a way to bring down his hits and home runs allowed, he's going to do nothing but throw-and-duck on a major league mound. Oddly enough, his K-rates and BB-rates actually look pretty darn good. This suggests to me that Hochevar had been pretty good at blowing pitches by minor league hitters, but needs to get better at locating within the zone and making less "hit this, chump!" pitches. It remains to be seen if he's capable of that, but he should get a long look in ST to give the Royals an idea of how close he is. Keep in mind, the dude turns 24 this year. He's pretty close to make or break. I don't root against Hochevar. Far from it, in fact, but he needs to get his butt in gear or he won't make anyone forget Steve Andrade. Yeah, that's right: I went there. Time to trade that 9+ K-rate for a couple less base knocks, Luke.
Not to be a broken record about this, but Bob McClure has his work cut out for him with all these projects. And we're not even counting Greinke as project-ish in this article, which he kind of still is until he's proven otherwise.
Token Lefty Possibility #2: John Bale
2007 Stats of Note:
40.0 IP, 26-0 G-GS, 116 ERA+, 4.05 ERA, 10.12 H/9, 9.45 K/9, 3.83 BB/9, 0.23 HR/9
We can't really laugh at this possibility, because there's a pretty good chance that Bale would be as good as JDLR would be in the rotation. If we have to have a lefty, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to give someone other than Mr. 5.82-ERA a shot. The thing is, Bale's track record suggests that he's always handled lefties well and struggled against righties. He actually did pretty well against both last year, but it was 40 innings so we really don't have much to go on. Suffice to say that if he doesn't make the rotation he can K a lot of batters coming out of the 'pen as one of the southpaws. If he does make the rotation...temper your expectations, since he's 33-year-old reliever who's always had a platoon split. Still, on a team where Brett Tomko looks like a fine back-of-the-rotation option, you could do worse than to root for Bale to dark horse his way into the five-man.
Beloved, But Absolutely Not To Be Counted On: Brandon Duckworth, Luke Hudson
Both don't really have 2007 stats that I feel comfortably saying reflect any "true ability." Neither one has shown any skill at staying healthy, and while I like them both...I'm not going crazy here. Both are longer shots than Kyle Davies, in my estimation.
The Sleeper: Joakim Soria
2007 Stats of Note:
69.0 IP, 62-0 G-GS, 189 ERA+, 2.48 ERA, 6.0 H/9, 9.78 K/9, 2.48 BB/9, 0.39 HR/9
There's pretty much nothing in that line that suggests to me that Soria couldn't be a successful major league starting pitcher if he can be eased into the role without the injury nexus claiming him. He did very, very well as closer last year, showing the ability to pitch multiple innings and close out strong line-ups. He's a smart pitcher too, as it's not as if he's just pumping 98-MPH fastballs by everyone. Soria has more than one good pitch, locates well, and seemed to thrive on the challenge of pitching in the majors as a Rule 5 pick.
The question is what the Royals want to do with him in the future. Given the other options listed, you can count me on the bandwagon of people who'd like to see what he could do with 100+ innings. It'd be an interesting out of the box idea if the Royals had Soria closing some games and starting others as the de facto fifth starter (who can be skipped a lot) to keep his workload down and get him starts at the same time. I don't think that's what will happen--I think he's 'pen bound this year--but I really think the Royals need to entertain this possibility sometime. One out of every twenty times, it proves the better idea to leave a younger, talented starter prospect in the bullpen. The other nineteen it's a waste of value.
All together, thosee are my thoughts on the competition for the fourth and fifth starter spots. It is very important to remember, when reading this article, that all teams have trouble filling out the back of the rotation, as the competition for the 4-5 spots might seem a little depressing otherwise. In terms of the Royals specifically, I'm not going to be so bold as to be make a prediction, because ST is going to play a big role here. While I'm on board with the idea that ST stats mean hardly anything at all, I'm so naive as to dismiss ST entirely. After all, if the organization didn't use some of their observations of ST play to fill out the roster, what exactly would they have to go on? No, sorry, like it or not, spring training play a role in forging the opening day roster and that's not going to change. Take the stats with a grain of salt, yes. But look for who's gained velocity and who's lost it, who's got a tight shoulder and who's lost weight, and who suddenly developed a split finger fastball. This may be a somewhat frustrating time of year for sabermetricians, but it's a fun time of year for all baseball fans.
Spreadsheet Baseball returns next week, hopefully rounding up some ST info. In the mean time, questions/comments on this effort are welcome/encouraged. Happy reading, and Don't Panic.
0 recs |
62 comments
Comments
2007 stats
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I didn't want to turn this into a megapost,
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, but
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hypebole alert
A litle nutty, don't you think? You're basically saying that he's not far from being a complete failure as a pitcher.
"Time to trade that 9+ K-rate for a couple less base knocks, Luke."
So if you are valuing a pitcher's ability to avoid giving up hits over peripherals like K/9 and K/BB, then can I assume you think that Bannister is going to continue to be a great major league pitcher with essentially no regression? [I don't recall your feelings on Bannister, so this is an honest question] For a pitcher with Hochevar's stuff, I think his K/9 and K/BB are a lot more telling than the frequency with which he gave up hits.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Make that hyperbole
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Slight hyberbole, yes.
In regard to Bannister, I'm a little worried about how he's going to start out after last year's workload. Long term, I think he'll be a lot like Brad Radke.
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Awful?
This guy is still a top 100 prospect (top 50 according to some) in baseball who everyone still realizes has plus stuff and plus control. And yet you think he may be sliding to irrelevance? Hochevar is one of the best young pitchers in this organization. He faced AA and AAA hitters for the first time last year and had some difficulty adapting to levels of competition which he'd never faced before. It was even harder to adapt without his best secondary pitch.
Slight hyperbole to compare him to Andrade? That was way over the top and unsupportable hyperbole. Essentially giving up on a very good prospect after one so-so minor league season is pretty silly.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fudge
Anyways, yes, Andrade is hyperbole for certain. And it was supposed to be, mainly because Hochevar's done so little so far profesionally. Please excuse the brainfart.
It wasn't meant to be dismissive of him, merely to highlight that Hochevar is old for a guy who's only played one full minor league season and hasn't had much success. I'm still pretty high on him, actually.
God, I have NO idea how I mixed up Tomko and Hochevar. Ugh. Working on Four hours sleep much be catching up to me.
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, now I know
"[Tomko]." Thank god, maybe I'm not going insane. Eevn if I cna't sepll.
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, my mistake there
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A safe bet.
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 10:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Andrade
And did you notice that after typing Tomko when I meant Hochevar, I typed Meche when I meant Hochevar? Maybe I'm having an aneurysm.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ARGH!
Yes, I saw Meche. I thought it was a joke, actually. You should've just said "aha! funny me!" :P
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 11:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like that more reasonable comp better
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 11:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Adjusting to a new level of competition
You have to expect a prospect to take a little time to adjust to a new level of competition, particularly without one of his best pitches. This guy is still a really good prospect.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Spring training vs. spring training stats
Official spring training stats are meaningless. Spring training and the performances therein are not meaningless. The organization can, should and will make its personnel decisions based on performance in prior years and performance in spring training. But "performance in spring training" does not mean "A Game stats." It means everything that they've seen from the player from the first workout to the last including all of his skills and tools.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think...
by Royals Nation on Feb 28, 2008 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, I'm sure...
by Royals Nation on Feb 28, 2008 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Spring training stats
And I really doubt anyone keeps track of "stats" from practices and intrasquad games, nor should they. Personnel decisions are made by the totality of observations that the organization makes about players througout spring training. And the stats, the few that there are, are a small part of that.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Terrific wrap up
I'm not wild about Davies being in the rotation, but its about time to see what he can do as a starter. Maybe you break camp with DLR in the rotation and Davies in Omaha. But by June, if DLR hasn't figured it out, I think its time to cut bait, or at least demote him to the pen to see what Davies can do.
It'll be really interesting to see what our rotation looks like in August. By then we could see Davies, Hochevar, Soria, maybe even Carlos Rosa making starts for this team. Exciting to think about.
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 3:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
i like that
Meche, Banny, Zack, Bale, Davies
CL Soria
SU Yabuta
SU Mahay
MR Gobble
MR Peralta
MR Hochevar (possible 6th starter)
LR Tomko (possible 6th starter)
That leaves Nunez...damn Tomko was a pointless signing (IMO). I hear McClure was in on that signing, so maybe (just maybe!) he can help him out.
by doublestix on Feb 28, 2008 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yea
Also I bet Tomko and DLR are the #4 and #5 starters.
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 10:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
god hillman scares me
be very afraid
by LeoBloom on Feb 28, 2008 3:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Oh brother
by timlacy on Feb 29, 2008 6:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hell, I'm not depressed
by raefzilla on Feb 28, 2008 4:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
#4 starter?
Maroth's ERA+ the last three years:
90, 109, 65
Elarton's ERA+ the three years before Allard handed him a two year $9 million deal and made him the Opening Day starter:
79, 76, 91
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 4:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right...
by raefzilla on Feb 28, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bale and Hochevar
On Bale's platoon splits, saying he is someone who has always "struggled against righties" and "always had a platoon split" is not accurate. Based on available data, the only time he struggled against righties was the 46.3 major league innings he pitched in 2003, which were so long ago that they have zero predictive value. Even then, in his prior major league action in 2001 (26 IP), he actually was pretty good against righties. Splits are not available from his recent NPL seasons, so all we really have to consider is last year. It would be fair to say that his success against righties is inconclusive, but not that he has always had a platoon split.
Hochevar's minor league K and BB rates translate roughly to 6.3 K9/3.3 BB9 (AA), which is merely okay, and 5.2 K9/3.6 BB9 (AAA), which is Jorge de la Rosa territory.
by Gopherballs on Feb 28, 2008 4:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I will say it again
Hochevar was not allowed to use his primary out pitch in AA/AAA last year.
this was done to improve his fastball command.
He posted those stats with guys basically knowing what was coming.
Fully unleashed, he is going to be a stud.
Not ML-calliber, not ML-average, a stud.
Book it...a stud...
by howserfan on Feb 28, 2008 5:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is facing the Tigers, Indians, Yankees, Red Sox
by Gopherballs on Feb 28, 2008 7:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rust
And since Piccollo, his coaches and Hochevar himself have all said that he wasn't allowed to throw his best secondary pitch, I think we can take the "allegedly" off of your above sentence.
by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 7:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am aware he was
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ERA bad, peripherals good
I do think he needs to put together a few months of real success in AAA before we send him out against Miguel Cabrera and Grady Sizemore.
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Your point is taken
by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 10:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you as long as...
by timlacy on Feb 29, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's the great unknown
Meche
Bannister
Greinke
Tomko
Soria
Yabuta
Mahay
Gobble
Bale
Peralta
That's 10 pitchers. The next tier includes:
Nunez
De La Rosa
Hochevar
Musser
Braun
Davies
Hudson is in the third tier with guys like Duckworth and Matt Wright.
De La Rosa or Nunez might be traded because they are out of options. But there would still have to be multiple injuries for Hudson to squeak his way onto the 25-man roster.
by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
if we lose Nunez, i will be upset
For this reason, I think the return on any package involving DLR or Nunez will be pretty low.
If it becomes apparent that there's only room for one of them on the roster, I think the best option may be to try to sneak DLR through waivers.
by marbotty on Feb 29, 2008 12:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd much rather have Nunez than DLR
by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 1:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You know I like him, RR,
by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I know they are longshots
by royaldaddy on Feb 29, 2008 1:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Maroth, Nomo and Lawrence
By the way, Tomko has a much better recent history than all of the above. There's a reason he's penciled into the rotation already. He's better than all of the rest of the contenders for the 4 and 5 spots.
With Tomko, we already have one aged vet filling a hole who won't be part of the team's future. I don't mind that. But I'd really hate to have two in the 12-man pitching staff. Given the nature of this season for the Royals, I'd really like to use one or two spots on the pitching staff to develop and audition young pitchers.
by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 2:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you on Tomko
by Gopherballs on Feb 29, 2008 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maroth
by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maroth, Nomo, and Lawrence
Lumsden? Hopefully he'll do well enough to get the call. I didn't see him as a candidate for the rotation with the way he pitched last year.
by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nomo is here for one reason...
by timlacy on Feb 29, 2008 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
More of a companion than a translator
by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 6:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
On Tomko's K rate
by CentralChamps2009 on Feb 29, 2008 10:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I did say it "might have"
by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 11:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Parks are not K neutral
by Gopherballs on Feb 29, 2008 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good catch
by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maroth/bigger question
NYRoyals brings up a very good question about the bigger picture. We all know any aging veteran who rounds out the rotation is simply a placeholder/innings-eater (mmmm, innings) while our high-upside prospects get more seasoning, but are we more pleased with Tomko and Maroth pitching adequately and keeping us in a few ballgames in 2008 versus letting some of our younger, high-upside guys audition against big-league hitting and possibly getting them primed for a solid if not great 2009/2010? It's an age-old question (at least for teams like KC with a seemingly perpetual dearth of quality pitching) about the pros and cons of developing more in AAA, as a big league SP, out of the bullpen, etc. There's probably no clear answer to that question, and that each prospect would likely benefit from a different scenario (AAA vs. SP vs. BP) depending on their individual skill level, experience, mentality, etc.
I'd be curious to hear what others think about this subject. I suspect we'd all have the knee-jerk reaction of being very pleased if Tomko does well for us this year, but does it really help us in the long run if he gets us a few extra wins this year at the expense of the development of a high-upside, near-ready prospect? Perhaps it does if his performance keeps our bullpen fresher and out of the game a little longer, as opposed to having a JDLR-type getting knocked out of games in the 3rd inning periodically and overextending the arms in our pen. Personally, if it came down to two scenarios, where someone like Tomko or Maroth yielded similar season-long stats to someone like JDLR or Davies but was a lot more reliable, less volatile with fewer ups and downs, I'd take the young guy every time, but whether or not those young guys can produce even in that capacity is still a big if.
Either way, the fact that we're going into the season confident about 3 starters and hopeful about a number of prospects as well as some decent retreads is a world of difference from the past few years. I don't see us ever having to worry about an ongoing Elarton-esque performance again, or a Mark Redman-ish #1 SP. That makes me very happy as a KC fan.
by royalblues on Feb 29, 2008 11:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
You can stick a fork in Maroth.
by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nunez
by loyal2s dad on Feb 29, 2008 1:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
He might get traded
by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
His Violent Delivery
by philofthenorth on Feb 29, 2008 11:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Soria
71 1/3 innings, 9-0, 1.77 ERA, 11 starts, 19 BB, 46 H, 73 K
by kctulsa94 on Mar 1, 2008 8:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 













